Friday, 4 May 2012

Peter Bone MP is a liar

I just had the misfortune to see Conservative MP Peter Bone on Newsnight and what he said made me so angry that I felt like throwing things at the telly. Unfortunately Simon Hughes, who was also on Newsnight, was far too polite and well-behaved to interrupt Mr Bone when he started saying that Lords reform is unnecessary and that the majority of people are against it, but, if I could have got him to do so, here's what I'd have liked Simon Hughes to have said:

"You're a liar. Mr Bone, you’re a liar. You’re right that Lords Reform should not be a priority - though the good thing about the government is that it can do more than one thing at once - but the fact is that all three of the parties put lords reform in their manifestoes, including your own, and over 80% of the British people support it. So if you don’t like it then why didn’t you have the courage to say so when you stood in the general election and why did you lie to the voters by standing on a manifesto promise which you now reveal yourself not to believe in?"

Maybe he could have then added a few choice words about the thoroughly undemocratic, pro-cronyism and archaic attitudes that Tory backbenchers like Mr Bone reveal themselves as having.

But that's just me. To blunt for my own bloody good.

20 comments:

  1. If I were a Lib Dem I don’t think I would be bandying manifesto pledges with anyone. After all how many did you renege on yourselves? Had Simon Hughes said that he would just have made a total fool of himself.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "if you don’t like it...why did you lie to the voters by standing on a manifesto promise which you now reveal yourself not to believe in?"

    A case of the pot calling the kettle a liar, and looking a little daft by doing so.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lib Dems have reneged on exactly one manifesto promise - tuition fees. That's something I'm deeply pissed off about. But the funny thing is, I object to dishonesty wherever it comes from. Though, given that Peter Bone acts like a reactionary, lying, hypocritical twunt a lot more than Clegg does then please forgive me if I focus slightly more ire on the former than on the latter.

    ReplyDelete
  4. One is enough!

    And what about your other erherm pledges/policies/commitments use which ever sophistry you like. What happened to things such as PR and fair votes? Fair taxes? VAT rise to 20%, thats fair is it? And also did you not used to be against nuclear power and against nuclear arms, so what happened to that green agenda that your manifesto went on about at length? What happened to a cleaning up politics which figured large in there, we still can’t sack useless and corrupt MPs? In actual fact how many of the wooly promises you made in there have you actually delivered?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, so does that mean you'll be leaving the SNP as soon as they break a pledge? Thought not.

      PR? Well yes, it would have been nice if we could have got it. But, given that the majority of the country voted for anti-PR parties in 2010 then how exactly do you expect us to have found a majority in parliament to get PR passed?

      Let me explain this to you. Simply.

      This is a *coalition* government. That means it is composed of two or more parties working together. Neither of them has enough seats in parliament to get policies passed on their own. Therefore they work together to get policies passed. But this means that they both have to agree on a policy before it is passed. This means that they have to compromise on policies. This means that each party can't get all of their policies passed. So each party has to give up on *some* of their policies in order to get *most* of their policies passed. And both parties in this coalition have gotten over 75% of their manifesto policies passed.

      Nuclear power? Our policy: no subsidies for nuclear power stations. Government policy: no subsidies for nuclear power stations.

      Nuclear weapons? Our policy: no renewal of Trident. Government policy: no renewal of Trident in this parliament.

      Sacking MPs? Our policy: give people the power to sack corrupt MPs. Government policy: legislation to give peopel the power to sack corrupt MPs is currently making its way through parliament.

      Fair taxes? Our policy: Raise the income tax threshold to £10,000. Government policy: Income tax threshold raised to ca. £9,200 and finish raising to £10,000 by 2015.

      PR and fair votes? Our policy: make the House of Lords directly elected and introduce PR for national elections. Government policy: make the House of Lords directly elected and held a referendum on changing the voting system for national elections.

      As for our other wooly policies - such as ending child detention, protecting civil liberties, scrapping ID cards, creating a Green Investment Bank, providing a poor pupil premium to give the poorest pupils a better start in life, extending free nursery care, improving maternity and paternity leave, creating hundreds of thousands of new apprenticeships - have all been delivered on.

      So, given that the SNP have broken at least as many promises as Lib Dems have, will you now be announcing your resignation from the SNP and your repudiation of Alex Salmond? Thought not.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for explaining that so simply! I imagine in context of your item above Mr Bone might just have employed a similar argument had Mr Hughes been intemperate enough to say what you suggested he say, i.e. it’s a coalition government etc etc......can’t get all things we want etc, etc.....national interest etc etc..blah, blah, blah and so forth. We have all heard it before so I’m amazed you couldn’t just fill in the blanks for yourself! But never mind you simple explanation of why the Lib Dems as sooo good will do just as well for you as it will for me! The only difference is I’m not deluded enough to believe it never mind have the bare faced cheek to regurgitate it here!

      Oh and it’s not me you need to explain it all to anyway. In case you hadn’t noticed it’s the electorate at large that are deserting your party for its perceived turncoat tendencies. Instead of wasting your condescending explanations on me perhaps you should get out there on that mythical doorstep and explain the benefits of Liberal Democracy in a coalition context to Joe Punter while you still have someone who will vote for you!

      I don’t actually think changing the names of things counts as achieving them neither does putting them off till some time in the future. Unlike the Lib Dems the SNP tries to do the things it says. But best of all its competent which your coalition most certainly is not and people trust it. That’s why an mid-term election “disaster” for the SNP looks to all the world like a success. While the one for the Lib Dems continues to look like the melt-down it actually is. Next stop for you oblivion! Next stop for us independence! So good luck.

      Delete
    3. To answer your point regarding my membership of the SNP. I most certainly would resign my membership if they ditched their reason for being as a matter of political expediency. You see I don’t carry my convictions round like so many bottles in a doctor’s valise. I’m very happy with what I get from the SNP: a competent administration that puts Scotland first. Are you happy with what you get from the Lib Dems?

      Delete
    4. Ah, so I see you've completely ignored all of the points I've made.

      Believe it or not, our reason for being is not ending tuition fees. It's about building and safeguarding a fair, free and liberal society. And the coalition is a means of achieving some of that - even if not to the extent we would ideally like. So I fail to see how we have ditched our "reason for being as a matter of political expediency".

      As for your feeble attepts at refuting what I've said, no parliament can bind it's successor, which means that any scrapping of trident would only be for a maximum of five years - so we've done as much as it's possible to do when it comes to trident. And as for "changing the names of things" my answer is simple; what on earth are you referring to?

      To put it bluntly, you asked me a series of questions about things like fairer taxes and nuclear power. I answered them. If you can't or won't accept the answers - which are all truthful I might add (unlike the likes of Salmond and, yes, Clegg and Cameron, I don't lie) - then the problem lies with you for being too blinkered to see reality.

      But don't worry, I *am* out on the doorstep frequently and, as far as I can tell, people as vitriolic as you are a very small minority - with most of them being the type who never would have voted for us in the first place. E.g. people exactly like you.

      And, at the end of the day, Lib Dems are getting on with doing what's right for the whole country - even though it's at the obvious cost to us of popularity and votes.

      In 2010 we made four key manifesto pledges that we said we'd stick to if we went into coalition and we've delivered on every one of them. One of those pledges was raising the income tax threshold to the benefit of hundreds of thousands of Scots. Meanwhile your own party is pursuing an economically illiterate case for separation from the UK. Now, don't get me wrong, I believe in self determination so Scotland is more than welcome to break away, but if your party had any conviction about what it claims to believe in, it would acknowledge the fact that independence carries a substantial financial cost to Scots and advocate independence in spite of that cost - instead of lying and smearing as "anti-Scottish" any Scotsman or woman who dares to disagree with your economic fiction.

      And that, I think, is the difference between the SNP and the Lib Dems. We broke a promise on tuition fees, but at least made sure the new system was much fairer than it would otherwise have been in, the SNP, on the other hand, lie about the facts behind their very raison d'etre. So, if you want to talk to me about mendacity, then I suggest you set your own house in order first.

      Delete
    5. As for why I'm telling this to you rather than the voters, the answer is simple. I'm capable of doing more than one thing - so I do both.

      Though, given that you come onto *my* blog and don't make any attempt at rational argument (something which I at least have the courtesy to do when I comment on your blog), I'm not entirely sure why I make the effort to do so - especially given that you seem to think that taking the time to answer you is some sort of political weakness on my part.

      Then again, that might be another difference between be liberals and the SNP - we're happy to debate with our opponents rather than trying to shout them down.

      Delete
    6. My God, your condescension knows no bounds. You will forgive me if I thought what we were discussing here is what you think Hughes should have said to Bone and why he didn’t. In other words he would simply have looked like an out and out hypocrite if he had seeing as the Lib Dems have not managed to implement their own manifesto.

      I’m not going to discuss the minutiae of what you think the Lib Dems have “achieved”. Why should I we hear that kind of mantra from the Lib Dems so often and as you are clearly as blinkered as you imply I am, what would be the point? Your very trite “explanation” of what a coalition government is all about tells me all I need to know to as once again it is the same mantra we hear so often. But the fact of the matter is it does not convince anyone does it? And saying it again and again and again does not make it any more convincing. Oh and incidentally please don’t have a go at me for not “answering” you points as you don’t answer mine either but just give me a party political broadcast on behalf of unionists. You don’t actually say what the lies are behind the SNP you just say they exist and that Alex Salmond is an economic illiterate. Now there is debate for you, I think what you mean is that in your opinion it economic illiteracy. In my opinion the Lib Dems are propping up a right wing government with an odious agenda and for everything they claim to “achieve” there is a resultant tit-for-tat with the Tories that results in any gain being more than negated. I clearly am not in a minority with this view as your recent electoral exploits attests. You however, with your narrow, ill-informed and downright biased opinion of the SNP are in a minority as our recent electoral exploits will also attest. The proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say.

      The facts of the matter are that no matter what you tell people you are doing and why. They don’t believe you and don’t vote for you either. I would love to see that mythical doorstep where the people on the other side tell you and Nick Clegg and Willie Rennie that the Lib Dems are doing everything right and in the national interest etc etc etc. They must be the best of inveterate liars because they don’t seem to go out and vote for you do they!

      I don’t write all of the stories on the blog which carries my name. But if this exchange has put you off commenting on it so be it. Additionally if you don’t want my “vitriolic” comments on here you only have to tell me to desist once. I’m sorry if plain speaking offends you but please don’t treat me as a credulous moron who will simply accept your “achievements” and your mantra at face value. I’m not!

      Delete
    7. Right, before I reply in detail, one question: if I reply to you are you going to complain again about me not being out on the doorstep telling this to people?

      If you are then there's no point in me replying. And if you aren't then perhaps you'd be good enough to retract your previous remarks on that particular subject.

      Delete
    8. I’m not complaining about you not being out on the doorsteps telling this to people. Rather I am lampooning your UK and Scottish leaders who use that phrase often to imply that grass roots voters give them a very warm reception when these giants have the condescension to go knocking on the doors of us mere mortals (as if they really did that for anything other than a photo opportunity). Then they tell us all that people on the doorsteps understand what the Lib Dems are doing etc etc. But then strangely they do disastrously in the election. So somebody somewhere isn’t telling the truth. I’m sure you will see the dichotomy here. So I won’t retract my previous remarks on that particular subject, instead I hope I have clarified them for you.

      Incidentally you say I have not engaged with your points. You mention the ending of the detention of children in your list of achievements. I understood that it was in your Scottish manifesto to close Dungavel immigration centre (a facility operated by the UK government), but that in actual fact the coalition government has not done this, but has instead awarded the contract to run the place to a company that runs Guantanamo bay and has a dubious human rights record. Is this true? I also understand that while families with children are no longer to be held at Dungavel they will instead be transferred to a “specialist” facility in Bedfordshire. Is this what you term ending child detention? You asked me what I meant by changing the name of something not making it an achievement. This is an example of what I mean by that. Is this facility in England not just detention by another name?

      Delete
    9. You're the one who suggested that I get out on the doorstep and tell this to people in the first place. I don't see how that's been clarified by your comments - all you've accomplished is muddying the waters.

      When it comes to child detention, I refer you to this.

      http://www.libdemvoice.org/tom-brake-mp-writes-child-detention-work-in-progress-25645.html

      It's not a subject I'm particularly knowledgeable about so it seems you might be right when it comes to children still being detained for short periods immediately prior to deportation. In which case it is incorrect to say that child detention has been ended - it would seem to be more of a work in progress with substantial progress already made.

      Delete
    10. Actually I said that instead of explaining the benefits of liberal democracy in a coalition context to me your time would be better served getting out on the mythical doorsteps and explaining it to would be voters. You said you could do both at the same time. You then refused to engage further unless I agreed not to ask you to explain anything on the doorsteps at all. I then admitted that I had in fact been making fun of your leaders tendencies to use that hackneyed phrase. I really don’t think I can be any clearer than that.

      Thanks for admitting that in actual fact that achievement has not been achieved. I think no more needs to be said on this subject, you have more than proved my point for me. The only thing I would say is that I would never employ a list of SNP achievements unless I was 100% sure they had been achieved.

      Delete
    11. Yes, it would appear that I was mistaken in my belief that child detention has been ended completely. I recognise that mistake and own up to it. On the other hand, the situation is significantly better than it used to be with families only being detained for short periods before deportation rather than the several months of the old system.

      Of course, if you refuse to make a list of SNP achievements because you're not sure that they're correct then that might explain why you've never listed even one.

      The rest of my list, however, is correct. You asked me about stuff like fair tax and I answered.

      RE: the original point about Mr Bone. We've managed to implement the bulk of our manifesto, as have the tories, as part of a jointly agreed coalition agreement. There is nothing inconsistent about having done that and pointing out when someone like Mr Bone backpedals on something that was in his own manifesto, which he stood on, and the coalition agreement. Nor with pointing out the lies he tells to support his position.

      Delete
    12. George I think you will find that I have not listed any SNP achievements because we are not actually discussing them here. So I have no idea where that comes from! Suffice to say I would not debate with you using a list I was not sure had actually been achieved. That is entirely different from not having listed the SNPs achievements of which there are many (please see my blog which usually either lists them or provides links to other blogs that do so). Nor would I simply regurgitate a party provided list of aspirations masquerading as achievements, which is what I am charitably assume you did.

      Delete
    13. I’m sure I put a comment on here that seems to have “disappeared”! How strange.

      Any way I will repeat it and hope for the best this time round.

      I have not provided you with a list of the many achievements of the SNP because that is not what we were discussing. It’s as simple as that. If you want to read of their achievements then I direct you to my blog where they are either written about or are linked to.

      I will repeat that I would NEVER employ a list of SNP “achievements” if I were not 100% sure that they had actually been “achieved”. By doing that you rob yourself of credibility, make your argument look weak and tainted and by and large fail to carry your point. After all why should we believe anything you say if we know you are apt to use made up facts to support your arguments? In this instance, for example, you have been forced to make a humiliating climb-down. At least you have had the good grace to apologise and admit that you were wrong.

      Delete
  5. Whey SNP member is told.

    A bit of a correction though; 75% of Lib Dem manifesto polices government policy with 57 seats, and only 60% of Conservative manifesto policies now government policy with about 307 seats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think not! The fat lady aint sung yet!

      Delete
  6. The three party groupings have each avoided doing the work on lords reform or asking for a heated debate about it. Obviously, any 15 year-old who has seen Brideshead Revisited would not want such people in a political role, if they still exist.

    Less obviously, the job is more or less a volunteer one unless you over-claim expenses to visit London. It's best given to people without party loyalty, but I could quote examples from different parties of people known mainly for party loyalty much more than for original thoughts or good conduct who have been given lordships. A kind of party list system. You vote-out your crap MP (as I did: Susan Kramer, Richmond) and see her pop-up again alongside the tory counsellor who out-sourced schooling to his dodgy faith group. I'd rather have the descendents of Brideshead Rivisited lords, with or without their life experience, than party hacks who are interested in faith groups running schools because that is a political taboo that the parties won't be rude about. If there aren't many good hereditery peers, how about a jury system by which random people are asked if they would like to apply? Or a celibrity channel: everyone nominate someone who nominates someone who hopefully isn't a B-list celebrity but might be?

    About Peter Bone. http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/01/445470.html Like his Labour peers in Leicester, he has said nothing about the Department for Business and the Greater London Authority's London Development Agency work subsidising Chinese footwear manufacturers to show in London and get free publicity. The reason? The posh people who make decisions and own the brands identify in their applications as being based in the UK. Some deal.

    ReplyDelete

I'm indebted to Birkdale Focus for the following choice of words:

I am happy to address most contributions, even the drunken ones if they are coherent, but I am not going to engage with negative sniping from those who do not have the guts to add their names or a consistent on-line identity to their comments. Such postings will not be published.

Anonymous comments with a constructive contribution to make to the discussion, even if it is critical will continue to be posted. Libellous comments or remarks I think may be libellous will not be published.

I will also not tolerate personation so please do not add comments in the name of real people unless you are that person. If you do not like these rules then start your own blog.

Oh, and if you persist in repeating yourself despite the fact I have addressed your point I may get bored and reject your comment.

The views expressed in comments are those of the poster, not me.